CGY @ CHI
2026-01-15 · final 3–1 · what happened, next to what the engine said before puck drop
What happened
CGY attacks the left net, CHI the right — every unblocked attempt the game produced: × goals, • on net, ◦ missed (hover a marker for the shooter and its xG). To compare against the pregame call, switch the Surface to the engine's predicted-xG map — the shots land on top of where the engine expected the game to be played.
| CGY | CHI | |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | Goals | 1 |
| 2.60 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.94 |
| 1.46 | 5v5 xG | 1.24 |
| 0.78 | Power-play xG | 0.22 |
| 22 | Shots on goal | 23 |
| 52 | Shot attempts | 47 |
Counts come from the shot table behind the maps: empty-net attempts and the shootout are excluded, so the goals row can trail the official final by an empty-netter or the shootout's deciding goal.
Goals
| Team | Scorer | Period | Strength | xG |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CGY | Yegor Sharangovich | 1 | PP | 0.51 |
| CGY | Mikael Backlund | 1 | PK | 0.16 |
| CHI | Nick Foligno | 1 | 5v5 | 0.08 |
The prediction, scored
Before puck drop the engine made CGY a 53.1% favorite, expecting a 2.71–2.54 game — CGY won 3–1, so the call landed. Every number in this section was issued before the game and is never re-graded.
| pred. xG | actual xG | pred. 5v5 | actual 5v5 | pred. ST | actual PP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CGY | 2.71 | 2.60 | 1.95 | 1.46 | 0.58 | 0.78 |
| CHI | 2.54 | 1.94 | 1.77 | 1.24 | 0.61 | 0.22 |
Predicted 5v5 / special-teams portions come from the map's strength splits (one shared scale per team pins the all-strengths total to its expected goals), so they don't sum exactly — the remainder is 4v4, 3v3, and other mixed states. The actual PP column is power-play xG only, the same bucket the map's special-teams view draws.
The pregame score grid
The likeliest finals the engine saw before the game, with what actually happened marked — ■ CGY · ■ CHI.
| Likeliest finals (CGY–CHI) | probability | |
|---|---|---|
| 2–2 | 6.2% | tied after regulation — OT/SO decides |
| 3–2 | 5.6% | |
| 2–3 | 5.3% | |
| 2–1 | 4.9% | |
| 3–3 | 4.8% | tied after regulation — OT/SO decides |
| 3–1 | 4.4% | what happened |
Scoreline odds treat the two teams' totals as independent — the engine's known simplification (it slightly under-counts regulation ties; the correlation term is registered v1.1 work). The OT/SO layer is a separate fitted model and is already inside the headline win probability.
The pregame read
The engine made CGY a 53.1% favorite — CHI controls 48.3% of the predicted xG. Of CGY's 2.71 expected goals, 1.95 should come at 5v5 and 0.58 on the power play; CHI projects 1.77 at 5v5 and 0.61 on the power play. The logistic challenger put the home side at 45.5%, Elo at 49.2%.
Tale of the tape
How each team fares on its own, season to date: per-game xG rates with league rank (of 32). Rank 1 is best on every row — orange ranks sit in the top third of the league, gray in the bottom third.
| CGY | CHI | |
|---|---|---|
| 2.57 (30th) | Offense xG for / game |
2.47 (32nd) |
| 3.04 (23rd) | Defense xG against / game |
3.06 (24th) |
| 0.60 (29th) | Power play PP xG / game |
0.58 (31st) |
| 0.74 (24th) | Penalty kill PP xG conceded / game |
0.63 (6th) |
Season-to-date form as of the site's latest build, shown for context — the ratings the engine actually used were its own as-of-game-day state. Replay this matchup in the lab →